Common instruments on small aircraft

"Ron Wanttaja" wrote

Close. IC-A5 aircraft transceiver. Built in, powered by the aircraft
electrical
system, hooked to the standard PTT switch. Replaced a defunct Narco, weighs
less than a pound. Hooked to an antenna made from Radio Shack and plumbing
parts.

I thought your electrical system consisted of a gel cell battery for the radio
and lights, charged on the ground by a 110V
battery charger. No?

I might have you confused with someone else. It does not happen very often. Me
getting confused, that is. At least I don't think it does. :-)
--
Jim in NC

On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 13:06:57 -0400, "Morgans" wrote:


"Ron Wanttaja" wrote

Close. IC-A5 aircraft transceiver. Built in, powered by the aircraft
electrical
system, hooked to the standard PTT switch. Replaced a defunct Narco, weighs
less than a pound. Hooked to an antenna made from Radio Shack and plumbing
parts.

I thought your electrical system consisted of a gel cell battery for the radio
and lights, charged on the ground by a 110V
battery charger. No?

I might have you confused with someone else. It does not happen very often. Me
getting confused, that is. At least I don't think it does. :-)

Add this to one of the times, then. :-) I've got a "normal" electrical system
in Moonraker, though given my preference, I would have preferred just a battery.
Too damn much weight in the generator, battery, and starter, though I did switch
to an Odyssey dry cell a couple of years back.

Ron Wanttaja

"Morgans" wrote in
:

Very frustrated.

I can certainly understand your frustration. That's why I plonked him for
about a week myself. But unlike your Smokers' example, you can plonk him and
then you won't see his messages... It's quite refreshing, actually.

Then after a few days you may realize that there's not much to read on this
board if you leave out his threads. He certainly has prompted a lot of
activity on this group...

You can instead choose just to ignore the questions or comments that don't
contribute to this group, and limit yourself to addressing the stuff that is
useful to pilots. That's what I have tried to do. For example, a discussion
of the different types of avionics that can be found on rentable aircraft
seems to be very appropriate in this newsgroup.

Admittedly, I've not been completely consistent, because admittedly, when he
leaves himself wide open it's just too much fun not to point out the folly of
his arrogance.

But unlike second hand smoke, there really is no one forcing you to read his
messages or even his threads...

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Judah writes:

I could be wrong, but I believe the Cruising Speed of a Baron is about
175 - 185Kts, or about 200-215MPH.

I get a ground speed of about 195-200 kts in many cases, which would
be as much as 230 mph.

So then how is it that you claim that that is not faster than driving?

In no-wind conditions, if both vehicles are travelling in a straight
line (rare for IFR aircraft, but even rarer for vehicles on the ground)
the Baron is faster by nearly a factor of 3. Perhaps you are not flying
the Baron properly to achieve maximum performance.

It's not a race, and there are many parts of the flight that are not
performed at maximum speeds. The route is usually close to being a
straight line, but not exactly.

I should be able to take a commercial flight from KPHX to KSAN and be
there in about 40 minutes. In fact, it takes several hours.

That's irrelevant here. You're talking about a Baron, which is a GA plane.
One of the reasons I fly GA is specifically because I don't have to get to
the airport 60 minutes before flight time just to stand in lines to get X-
Ray'd and/or felt up. I get to the airport, do a preflight, start the
engines, and go. Typically 10-20 minutes of preparation.

It's not all that different than checking for oil and filling up the gas
tank before taking a cross-country trip in your car.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

If only commercial airline flights required just "actual flying time."

And if only cross-country travel by car required only "actual driving time".
You are very effective at comparing apples to oranges. Some people would call
it Sophistry.

Judah writes:

Actually, you are incorrect. MANY airports have museums either on the field
or within walking distance.

The Louvre doesn't.

There are also airports within mountain terrain
(and of course, you don't actually have to land on a mountain to appreciate
it from the sky). And there are even several airports with Beaches on the
field or within easy reach of the airport by walking, taxi, or public
transportation.

I guess if you want to see the specific museums, beaches, or ski
resorts that are right next to airfields, then you're in luck. If you
want to see anything else, though, that's not going to work.

KACY - Short cab ride to Atlantic City Casinos

Cab rides don't count.

There are many pleasurable things to do using aircraft, especially if you
enjoy flying.

Yes. But aircraft for basic transportation are far less practical,
except for the kind of long-distance transportation provided by
commercial airlines.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Judah wrote in
:

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

plane. One of the reasons I fly GA is specifically because I don't
have to get to the airport 60 minutes before flight time just to stand
in lines to get X- Ray'd and/or felt up. I get to the airport, do a
preflight, start the engines, and go. Typically 10-20 minutes of
preparation.

The above verifies based on my own experiences and looking back on one of
my own videos from KJAN to KMBO

Preflight 7 minutes
Startup procedures 1:05 minutes
Ground clearance 10 seconds.
Taxi 3:00 minutes
Runup 1:30 minutes
Clearance for take off 2 seconds (number one for takeoff)

So from opening the door of the plane to take off takes on average 12 1/2
minutes for me.

It's not all that different than checking for oil and filling up the
gas tank before taking a cross-country trip in your car.

Exactly right. Just a normal procedure and makes it even safer then most
cars on the road.....

At least all "major" systems and components are checked before a journey
in which most poeple can't say they do for their cars, such as check the
oil level, antifreeze level, battery condition and so on and so on.

I'd bet most people don't check the air pressure on their tires before a
long journey.

Allen

Judah writes:

Again, a lack of training has left you without some very basic knowledge.
You can toggle between your primary and backup frequency even on 1 VOR to
pinpoint your position with good accuracy. You already have the skill, you
just don't understand how to apply them because you have not had proper
training.

Makeshift solutions are not something I'd want to depend on.

Unfortunately, the perspective in a Sim does not compare to the actual
perspective in a real airplane, and so I understand your concern. In a real
plane, this is not a major issue.

If weather conditions permit. But ideally I'd want to be able to fly
even in poor visibility.

Yes, but in real life, there are many more cues than just the road.

Not in the deserts of the American Southwest. Sometimes it's nothing
for miles. Although I'll grant that with a chart I might be able to
find something.

The basic idea was to just follow a highway to my destination, since
I've read that early pilots managed to do this much of the time.

You can
use your sectional to determine the location of towers, bridges, cities,
tracks, and other similar milestones so that you are not dependent on a
single point of failure.

If I had a sectional. Unfortunately, those are expensive, and finding
one for the southwestern U.S. in France would be problematic (and
costly).

I believe the G1000 panel has steam-guage backups of the minimum required
equipment.

I prefer a more non-integrated solution, because it reduces
interdependent failures. If the G1000 were just an information
display, fine; but I would not trust it to tie everything together.
That's too much dependence on one box.

The club members split the costs. The club has grown through several planes
over many years, and I have not been a member since the beginning, so I
don't know the exact history of how the first planes were purchased.
However, I imagine it started off with some number of people who decided to
start a flight club, purchased a plane or two using a mortgage, and split
the costs of the mortgage, tiedown, maintenance, upgrades, etc. I doubt
very much than anyone other than a bank "paid for all that gear up front".

Still, a fleet of planes is quite an investment. How many aircraft
are there, and how many members in the club?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Judah writes:

And if only cross-country travel by car required only "actual driving time".

They do. You can drive directly from door to door, so total travel
time is essentially the same as driving time.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Judah writes:

So then how is it that you claim that that is not faster than driving?

Where did I claim that? I said exactly the opposite, in fact.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.